Amnesty International Canada's Legal Work Database

In addition to its monitoring work and public campaigns, Amnesty International is very involved in legal work to ensure that the Canadian and provincial governments are acting consistently with their international human rights obligations. Amnesty’s legal work frequently involves the themes of the rights of Indigenous Peoples, security and human rights, the rights of refugees and migrants, and corporate accountability, among others.

To learn more about Amnesty's Partners in Justice legal work,click here.

Legal Briefs

In 2007, a complaint that the Assembly of First Nations and the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society had brought to the Canadian Human Rights Commission was referred for a hearing before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, alleging that the underfunding of child welfare services for children living on reserves is discriminatory under the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA). Amnesty International intervened in the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society Case at the Federal Court , Federal Court of Appeal and Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.

In June 2014, the National Energy Board (NEB) approved plans by a group of multinational corporations to carry out seismic exploration for oil and gas in the coastal waters of Baffin Island. The project risks causing damage to marine life that forms an integral basis of Indigenous subsistence and cultural practices of the local Inuit population. As a result, the predominantly Inuit Municipality of Clyde River, the Nammautaq Hunters and Trappers Organization, and the Mayor of Clyde River have taken the case to court, alleging that the NEB failed to adequately consider the harmful effects of seismic testing on marine mammals and on Inuit food, economy and culture, and that the decision violated the constitutional rights of the Inuit to be consulted and accommodated. Amnesty International requested leave to intervene in this case at both the Federal Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada.

Until late 2005 Canada’s policy and practice was to transfer prisoners apprehended in Afghanistan into the custody of US military forces. Amnesty International had consistently opposed that practice out of serious human rights concerns, including the United States’ refusal to recognize the applicability of the Geneva Conventions; concerns about torture and ill-treatment at US military detention sites in Afghanistan; the risk of the death penalty; and the possibility that detainees would be sent to Guantanamo Bay.

Bill C-304, the Secure, Adequate, Accessible and Affordable Housing Act was first introduced as a private member’s bill at the House of Commons in February 2009. The principal change to housing policy brought about by Bill C-304 would be the obligation of the Minister responsible for the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation to establish a national housing strategy.

BILL C-11, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, was introduced in the House of Commons in March 2010. The Bill introduced a number of amendments into the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and the Federal Courts Act that the government purported would make the refugee determination process in Canada “fast, fair, and efficient” Bill C-11:

Bill C-31, the Protecting Canada’s Immigration System Act, was tabled in the House of Commons in February 2012. The Bill made several amendments to Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA)

Bill C-43, the Faster Removal of Foreign Criminals Act, was tabled in the House of Commons in June 2012. The Bill follows Canada’s practice of preferring exclusion or deportation over extradition or prosecution. It proposes amendments to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act allowing the Minister, on his or her own initiative, to declare that any foreign national may not enter Canada for a period of three years if – in the Minister’s opinion – it is justified on the basis of public policy considerations. Bill C-43 eliminates humanitarian relief and appeal procedures for certain kinds of criminals and suspected criminals, which facilitates their removal but also hinders efforts to hold them accountable for their conduct.

Bill C-300, the Corporate Accountability of Mining, Oil and Gas Corporations in Developing Countries Act was a private member’s bill first introduced in the House of Commons in February 2009. Bill C-300 proposed to increase levels of accountability and oversight in Canada for the operations of Canadian extractive companies operating abroad. It would do so by directing the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and International Trade to issue guidelines that articulate corporate accountability standards for Canadian extractive companies consistent with international human rights instruments, norms, and standards. Amnesty International provided a brief in strong support of Bill C-300 to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development. Amnesty International has long been concerned about the impact that some companies and other economic actors have on human rights.

Mr. Gavrila came to Canada from Romania in 2004 and made a successful claim for refugee protection on the basis that he was being persecuted for his Roma ethnicity and based on his advocacy activities on behalf of a Roma organization. After his refugee claim was recognized in Canada, Romanian authorities requested his extradition to serve a prison sentence in Romania, as he was convicted in abstentia of forging visas. Amnesty International intervened before the Supreme Court of Canada in Mr. Gavrila’s case to argue that Canada’s extradition and refugee determination procedures are interconnected.

Mr. Hinzman was an American soldier. He applied for conscientious objector status on the basis of his moral and religious opposition to the United States’ wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. His application was refused by the US military, and before being deployed in Iraq, he, his wife, and his son fled to Canada. When they arrived in Canada, they made a refugee claim in February 2004 on the basis that Mr. Hinzman would be court martialed and put at risk of torture and persecution if he returned to the United States. Amnesty International applied to intervene in Mr. Hinzman’s case before the Federal Court of Appeal.

On 6 September 1995, an Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) sniper shot and fatally wounded an unarmed Indigenous man, Dudley George, after police moved to forcibly end a land rights protest at Ipperwash Provincial Park. A landmark provincial inquiry was established on 12 November 2003 to look into the factors leading to the confrontation between protestors and police and ways to prevent excessive use of force in the future.

On 29 December 2004, the governments of Canada and the United States of America also implemented the Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America for cooperation in the examination of refugee status claims from nationals of third countries – also known as the Safe Third Country Agreement (STCA). The STCA prevents refugees from seeking safe haven in Canada if they are seeking to enter from the United States at a land border, and vice versa. The agreement provides that refugees must make a claim for protection in the country – Canada or USA – that they enter first. Claims made at the Canada-USA land border are summarily rejected unless the claimant satisfied one of a number of specified exceptions. Amnesty International and a number of other Canadian human rights organizations challenged the constitutionality of the STCA before the Federal Court of Canada.

Nell Toussaint lived and worked in Canada as an undocumented migrant from 1999 to 2008. In November 2008, Ms. Toussaint became too ill to work but remained in Canada. She applied for health care coverage under Canada’s Interim Federal Health Program (IFHP), which is authorized to provide health coverage for “anyone under immigration jurisdiction or for whom immigration authorities feel responsible” where a person cannot afford the costs of medical care. Canada denied Ms. Toussaint access to the IFHP on the basis that she did not fit into any of the four categories of persons eligible for health coverage set out in Citizenship and Immigration Canada guidelines: refugee claimants, resettled refugees, persons detained under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, and victims of human trafficking. Amnesty International provided an amicus brief in support of Ms. Toussaint’s petition to the UN Human Rights Committee.

This case concerns the proposal of Taseko Mines Limited to dig a gold-copper mine on the traditional territory of the Tsilhqot’in indigenous peoples near Teztan Biny and Fish Lake in British Columbia. The proposed mine pit would reach a diameter of up to 1.6 km, be surrounded by an exclusion area of almost 30 km2, and operations would bury large tracts of traditional land under a 12km2 tailings pond. The Tsilhqot’in people had previously established legal rights to continue cultural practices such as fishing and capture of wild horses throughout their traditional territory, and opposed the mine on the basis that it would have a severe impact on these rights.

Manickavasagam Suresh was a refugee from Sri Lanka who applied for landed immigrant status in Canada. In 1994, the government of Canada alleged that he was a security risk to Canada because he was a member of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, an alleged terrorist organization. Canada detained Mr. Suresh and commenced deportation proceedings. Mr. Suresh argued that he should not be deported because he faced a serious risk of torture if returned to Sri Lanka. His case made it to the Supreme Court of Canada, which needed to determine whether Canadian law permits deporting individuals to a risk of torture. Amnesty International intervened before the Supreme Court of Canada in Mr. Suresh’s case.

This case was brought by a number of individuals who have experienced homelessness and inadequate housing in Ontario and Canada. They argued that the provincial and federal governments’ failure to devise and implement a strategy to reduce homelessness and inadequate housing violated their rights to life, to security of the person, and to equality under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen and father of two, was travelling home to Canada after visiting his wife’s family in Tunisia in 2002. While changing planes at New York City’s JFK airport, he was detained and held for 12 days by US authorities. He was then transferred secretly, via Jordan, to Syria, where he was held in degrading and inhumane conditions, interrogated, and tortured for a year. Amnesty international was granted intervener status at Arar Inquiry. We also intervened as amicus curiae before the Supreme Court of the United States.

Amnesty International published a legal brief in advance of former US President George W Bush’s planned visit to Canada in October 2011. The facts presented in the brief are sufficient to give rise to mandatory obligations for Canada under international law, should former President Bush enter Canadian territory, to: launch a criminal investigation; arrest former President Bush or otherwise secure his presence during that investigation; and submit the case to competent authorities in Canada for the purpose of prosecution if it does not extradite him to another state able and willing to do so.